Predicting near-term deterioration of hospital patients

ABSTRACT

Methods, systems, and computer storage media are provided for predicting a probability of acute deterioration for a specific patient. Various discrete measurements are taken regarding the patient&#39;s current health. Those measurements are used to determine a PPOD score, which is displayed for clinicians.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of, and claims priority from, U.S.patent application Ser. No. 13/270,748, filed Oct. 11, 2011, entitled“PREDICTING NEAR-TERM DETERIORATION OF HOSPITAL PATIENTS,” which isincorporated herein by reference in its entirety.

BACKGROUND

Major problems in delivery of safe and effective care services inhospitals involve deficiencies in the quality and continuity of patientcare, including the monitoring of each patient's condition over time.Despite recent advances in electronic health records (EHR) systems, thepresent state of the art in medical care within hospitals still does notin general utilize the accruing medical record information for active,prognostic use-cases, to predict the future status or events or outcomesthat are likely to materialize for the patient. Instead, in manyscenarios the EHR acts mainly as a passive repository for documentingand storing the information that is generated by each provider and eachdepartment, which characterizes the current or previous status oroutcomes that have already materialized.

During a typical hospital stay, each patient may see many doctors andmany nurses. Such fragmentation of responsibility for the care processchallenges the ability of each provider to quickly and accurately graspthe meaning of the constellation of accumulating clinical and laboratoryfacts about the patient, to understand trends that may be developing inthe patient's health status, and to evaluate the urgency of attentionthat is necessary to effectively address existing or newly developingissues or to successfully prevent potential adverse events andcomplications.

The consequence of the proliferation of medical information in eachpatient acute care episode, combined with the all-too-commonfragmentation of the care process with responsibilities divided amongdozens of provider personnel most of whom do not have deep orlongstanding familiarity with the patient, is that unexpectedphysiologic deterioration occurs to many patients, especiallypost-operatively or post-medical procedures, such that a medical crisisensues. Precious care resources of the hospital are diverted in anattempt to save the patient, and needless suffering and even deathoccur. In many such instances, the impending deterioration could havebeen predicted—provided that enough vital signs and other monitoringdata were acquired in advance; provided that that data were integratedinto a suitably accurate personalized predictive model; and providedthat the output of the model were effectively communicated to theproviders who have the responsibility to intervene and prevent or managethe predicted risk of acute deterioration.

While the recognition and interpretation of some acute events such asloss of consciousness or dyspnea or new onset of fever or decompensationof blood pressure or other hemodynamic parameters are clear-cut, inother cases the events or changes are not readily recognized orinterpreted, particularly by personnel who have not previously beeninvolved in the patient's care. A change in systolic blood pressure(SBP) to 180 mm Hg might for one person be of ominous and criticalsignificance (for example, in a person whose usual SBP is 110 mm Hg),but carries no adverse prognostic significance for a person whosechronic, poorly controlled hypertension is associated with a usual SBPof 190 mm Hg.

Life-threatening deterioration of patients' health status while in ahospital is often preceded by abnormalities in hemodynamic variables andorgan-system parameters measured by clinical and laboratory tests. Overthe past several years there have emerged a variety of rapid responseteam (RRT) and early-warning system (EWS, MEWS, PARS, etc.) methods thataim to combine such information and calculate an index or score that canbe used to gauge the risk of acute deterioration and, if the risk issufficiently high, notify the responsible physicians, transfer thepatient to an alternate location where intensified monitoring and careservices can be provided, and/or undertake other actions to prevent ormitigate the predicted deterioration.

Frequently, however, there is no obvious or apparent abnormality invital signs or other clinical or laboratory variables that precedes thedeterioration and, in such instances, the RRT- and MEWS-typecalculations fail, giving a ‘false-negative’ assurance that there willbe no near-term deterioration in the patient's status when in factdeterioration does materialize. A Hodgetts Score=7 has only asensitivity of 64%, and Score=8 yields sensitivity of only 52%, forexample. In other words, in 36% and 48% of cases, respectively, afalse-negative interpretation is ascribed and the Hodgetts score failsto alert the caregivers to the deterioration that ensues.

In other instances, fluctuations in the values of physiologic variablesthat are utilized by an RRT or MEWS-type calculations give rise to‘false-positive’ alarms, incorrectly identifying a given patient as onein whom acute deterioration is likely when in fact no deteriorationoccurs. In such a situation, valuable resources associated withintensified monitoring or other interventions are misapplied. Theresources are allocated to the given patient, in whom those resourcesare not in fact necessary and provide no benefit, and, insofar asresources are finite and in short supply, those resources are duringthat same time interval withheld from other patients, for whom theresources might have provided greater value and benefit.

Thus, a significant limitation of a number of existing models fordetermining or predicting patient deterioration in health is of limitedstatistical sensitivity and specificity, with substantial false-negativeand false-positive rates. Most of the commonly applied regressionequations or CART or decision-tree or neural-network or otherclassification algorithms are able only to achieve receiver operatingcharacteristic (ROC) area-under-the-curve (AUC) discriminationperformance of approximately 75% to 80%. Certain existing models achieveROC AUC of up to 90% in selected subpopulations, such as patients in anemergency department.

Another significant limitation looking at the current state of the artis that the variables that are included in the predictions are oftentemporally ‘lagging indicators’ (such as serum creatinine or othermetabolic indicators of kidney function), which broadly characterize abackground of diminished organ-system capacity or organ-systemvulnerability to physiologic stressors. But it is a background that isat the time of calculation of the RRT- or MEWS-type score alreadyobvious to the physicians who are managing the patient's care. The RRT-or MEWS-type score does not tell the physicians anything that they donot already know. The same is also true for variables that are nottemporally ‘lagging’ ones.

For example, ‘threatened airway’ (or ‘respiratory rate <5 bpm or >30bpm’) is included in several models of the prior art, but this is not avariable that should require elaborate calculations to interpret, norshould decision-making regarding whether to intervene or intensifymonitoring of the patient await computation of a multivariable scorethat incorporates such variables.

An acute change in mental status (such as is often measured by GlasgowComa Score or other scales) is likewise intuitively obvious with regardto portending increased risk of further deterioration or adverse events.An acute change in body temperature is another example of a self-evidentor ‘obvious’ indication of acutely altered risk of acute deterioration.The risk that is entailed by such information is obvious on its face,and an index or score that references these variables adds little valuetoward prediction or anticipatory decision-making to prevent declininghealth or to manage adverse events that have not thus far materialized.Such ‘obvious’ information and scores derived from them primarily serve(a) as a post-facto form of concise documentation of the materializedabnormalities and associated, already-obvious increased risk and (b) asa means of triaging or prioritizing patients according toalready-materialized severity of illness.

Still further, another limitation of the existing art is that thepredictive models typically rely upon measurements that are oftenperformed in an imprecise and inconsistent manner. For example,measurement of diastolic blood pressure (DBP) by auscultation ofKorotkoff sounds with a stethoscope and blood pressure cuff ought inprinciple to be a relatively accurate and precise process. However,haste and poor technique on the part of the observer often cause DBPmeasurements to be in error by many millimeters of mercury. It isdifficult to compel improvements by busy caregivers who are prone tomake imprecise and inconsistent measurements. As a result, anypoint-estimate or single-point-in-time predictor that is based onvariables whose values tend to be subject to inaccuracy, imprecision andinconsistency in measurement technique tend to generate wide variationsin predicted risk. By contrast, variables whose measurements do notpresent such difficulties (such as systolic blood pressure SBP and heartrate HR) are amenable to more accurate, precise predictions.

BRIEF SUMMARY

This summary is provided to introduce a selection of concepts in asimplified form that are further described below in the DetailedDescription. This summary is not intended to identify key features oressential features of the claimed subject matter, nor is it intended tobe used as an aid in determining the scope of the claimed subjectmatter.

A system, method and computer-readable media are provided fordetermining a numerical probability of acute deterioration inhospitalized patients. Serial medical data of a particular patient isreceived from a plurality of inputs. Based on a transformation of thedata, a predicted probability of acute deterioration (PPOD) score iscalculated. The PPOD score is displayed for clinicians, to ensure thattimely and effective measures may be taken to mitigate the patient'schances of acute deterioration.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The present invention is described in detail below with reference to theattached drawing figures, wherein:

FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an exemplary computing environment suitablefor use in implementing the present invention; and

FIGS. 2A and 2B represent a flow diagram illustrating an exemplaryprocess for determining a numerical probability of acute deteriorationin hospitalized patients.

FIG. 3 is a table showing indices of the deviation of a current systolicblood pressure (SBP) from a patient's usual SBB, computed as a quadraticfunction of the absolute value of the difference between the current SBPand the patient's usual SBP;

FIG. 4 shows results corresponding to a patient whose conditiondeteriorated within 18 hours;

FIG. 5 shows a plot of the results in of the table of FIG. 4;

FIG. 6 shows results corresponding to a patient whose condition did notdeteriorate; and

FIG. 7 shows a plot of the results in of the table of FIG. 6.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The subject matter of the present invention is described withspecificity herein to meet statutory requirements. However, thedescription itself is not intended to limit the scope of this patent.Rather, the inventors have contemplated that the claimed subject mattermight also be embodied in other ways, to include different steps orcombinations of steps similar to the ones described in this document, inconjunction with other present or future technologies. Moreover,although the terms “step” and/or “block” may be used herein to connotedifferent components of methods employed, the terms should not beinterpreted as implying any particular order among or between varioussteps herein disclosed unless and except when the order of individualsteps is explicitly described.

Embodiments of the present invention relate to determining a numericalprobability of acute deterioration in hospitalized patients. Inembodiments, serial medical data of a particular patient is receivedfrom a plurality of inputs. Based on a transformation of the data, apredicted probability of acute deterioration (PPOD) score is calculated.The present invention is particular beneficial for patients in whomother acute condition or deterioration scoring systems yieldfalse-negative results. Despite the superior sensitivity to accuratelyrecognize patients at-risk whose abnormalities are not obvious, theinvention simultaneously achieves specificity that is superior to theprior art. In an embodiment, the ROC AUC of the present invention isgreater than 89% in a sample patient population. In part, this greateraccuracy and discriminatory power to classify individual cases correctlyis due to the invention's utilization of multivariate copula timeseriesmethods, which enable inferences based on statistical interrelationshipsbetween two or more clinical or laboratory variables measuredsimultaneously at a plurality of timepoints.

In embodiments, the present invention receives incoming medical datafrom a patient (e.g., through an interface), transforms the medicaldatum into a transformed PPOD value, and combines the transformed PPODvalues corresponding to each of the medical datum into a single PPODvalue. The predicted probability of acute deterioration (PPOD) score maythen be displayed on a computing device as a PPOD plot over apredetermined time frame, such that a user may identify risk trends in apatient by evaluating said PPOD plot.

In addition to the features of the predicted probability of acutedeterioration and uses thereof, it is further contemplated that aplurality of PPOD scores of various patients relevant to a clinician(provider) or a hospital or practice area may be assembled as a panel ofpredicted probability of acute deterioration charts, giving a nurse ordoctor an overview as to the progress of many patients at one time.

Having briefly described embodiments of the present invention, anexemplary operating environment suitable for use in implementingembodiments of the present invention is described below. Referring tothe drawings in general, and initially to FIG. 1 in particular, anexemplary computing system environment, for instance, a medicalinformation computing system, on which embodiments of the presentinvention may be implemented is illustrated and designated generally asreference numeral 100. It will be understood and appreciated by those ofordinary skill in the art that the illustrated medical informationcomputing system environment 100 is merely an example of one suitablecomputing environment and is not intended to suggest any limitation asto the scope of use or functionality of the invention. Neither shouldthe medical information computing system environment 100 be interpretedas having any dependency or requirement relating to any single componentor combination of components illustrated therein.

The present invention may be operational with numerous other generalpurpose or special purpose computing system environments orconfigurations. Examples of well-known computing systems, environments,and/or configurations that may be suitable for use with the presentinvention include, by way of example only, personal computers, servercomputers, hand-held or laptop devices, multiprocessor systems,microprocessor-based systems, set top boxes, programmable consumerelectronics, network PCs, minicomputers, mainframe computers,distributed computing environments that include any of theabove-mentioned systems or devices, and the like.

The present invention may be described in the general context ofcomputer-executable instructions, such as program modules, beingexecuted by a computer. Generally, program modules include, but are notlimited to, routines, programs, objects, components, and data structuresthat perform particular tasks or implement particular abstract datatypes. The present invention may also be practiced in distributedcomputing environments where tasks are performed by remote processingdevices that are linked through a communications network.

Remote computers 116 may be located at a variety of locations in amedical or research environment, for example, but not limited to,clinical laboratories, hospitals and other inpatient settings,veterinary environments, ambulatory settings, medical billing andfinancial offices, hospital administration settings, home healthcareenvironments, and clinicians' offices. Clinicians may include, but arenot limited to, a treating physician or physicians, specialists such assurgeons, radiologists, cardiologists, and oncologists, emergencymedical technicians, physicians' assistants, nurse practitioners,nurses, nurses' aides, pharmacists, dieticians, microbiologists,laboratory experts, genetic counselors, researchers, veterinarians,students, and the like. The remote computers 116 may also be physicallylocated in nontraditional medical care environments so that the entirehealthcare community may be capable of integration on the network. Theremote computers 116 may be personal computers, servers, routers,network PCs, peer devices, other common network nodes, or the like, andmay include some or all of the components described above in relation tothe server 110. The devices can be personal digital assistants, mobilephones, tablet computers, or other like devices.

Exemplary computer networks 114 may include, without limitation, localarea networks (LANs) and/or wide area networks (WANs). Such networkingenvironments are commonplace in offices, enterprise-wide computernetworks, intranets, and the Internet. When utilized in a WAN networkingenvironment, the server 110 may include a modem or other means forestablishing communications over the WAN, such as the Internet. In anetworked environment, program modules or portions thereof may be storedin the server 110, in the database cluster 112, or on any of the remotecomputers 116. For example, and not by way of limitation, variousapplication programs may reside on the memory associated with any one ormore of the remote computers 116. It will be appreciated by those ofordinary skill in the art that the network connections shown areexemplary and other means of establishing a communications link betweenthe computers (e.g., server 110 and remote computers 116) may beutilized.

In operation, a user may enter commands and information into the server110 or convey the commands and information to the server 110 via one ormore of the remote computers 116 through input devices, such as akeyboard, a pointing device (commonly referred to as a mouse), atrackball, or a touch pad. Other input devices may include, withoutlimitation, microphones, satellite dishes, scanners, or the like.Commands and information may also be sent directly from a remotehealthcare device to the server 110. In addition to a monitor, theserver 110 and/or remote computers 116 may include other peripheraloutput devices, such as speakers and a printer.

Although many other internal components of the server 110 and the remotecomputers 116 are not shown, those of ordinary skill in the art willappreciate that such components and their interconnection are wellknown. Accordingly, additional details concerning the internalconstruction of the server 110 and the remote computers 116 are notfurther disclosed herein.

Various patient deterioration early-warning systems (e.g., EWS, MEWS,PARS) are typically used to determine a patient's need to be transferredto the ICU by providing an emergency ‘alert’ notification via email orSMS text message or by other means, to the attending physician and toRapid Response Team staff, who then undertake appropriate review anddecisions as indicated. However, many existing RRT- and EWS-type systemsare point-estimate predictions at a point in time and do not conveylongitudinal trend information. Also, they are limited in the number offactors analyzed and thus are quite insensitive to a broad range ofhealth conditions that account for a substantial proportion of thedeterioration events that arise.

For example, a patient whose heart rhythm is prone to become rapid(nonsustained ventricular tachycardia; NSVT) may be at risk forlife-threatening cardiac arrhythmias. In many such patients, the body'scirculatory system has sufficient hemodynamic reserve and resiliency totolerate NSVT for extended periods of time. But in other patients, thehemodynamic reserve may be deficient, or the baroreceptor responsesensitivity may be impaired, or other abnormalities may exist such thatNSVT is poorly tolerated even briefly, producing a cascade ofinterrelated cardiac ejection and conduction derangements, leading tolife-threatening cardiac events. None of the prior art RRT- or EWS-typesystems collect or analyze variables so as to be able to ascertain theability to tolerate NSVT or other transient stresses.

Derangements in vital sign measurements may presage inadequate tissueoxygenation and/or reduced ability to tolerate ventricular tachycardiaor other acute conditions, which in turn can lead to multi-organdysfunction and an increase in the risk of death. Early detection ofphysiologic derangements may lead to more timely treatment, less organdysfunction and reduced risk of death. But early detection cannot occurunless vital signs and other variables are measured sufficientlyfrequently. Frequent measurement is a strategy that has often beenneglected but is now progressively improving since the introduction ofRRT- and MEWS-type systems.

Parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous system disturbances are found inmany conditions, including advanced age, ischemic heart disease, heartfailure, and autoimmune conditions, among others. In various systemicdiseases, such as diabetes mellitus, reduction of heart rate (HR)variability typically precedes the clinical expression of autonomicneuropathy. Spectral analysis of HR variability is a sensitive,non-invasive tool to detect early disturbances of the autonomic nervoussystem.

The baroreceptors in the carotid sinus and the baroreflex feedback loopconstitute a primary physiological system involved in short-term bloodpressure control. Stretch receptors in the carotid sinus and aortic archare stimulated by the distension which accompanies increased bloodpressure, impulses pass via afferent nerves to vasomotor andcardioinhibitory centers in the brainstem resulting in vasodilatation,bradycardia, and reduction in cardiac output. Conversely, decreasedblood pressure is sensed by the baroreceptors resulting incardiostimulation and vasoconstriction, tachycardia, and increase incardiac output. Blunted baroreflex sensitivity is associated withincreased risk of vasovagal syncope, orthostatic hypotension, and suddencardiac death following myocardial infarction.

Orthostatic challenge to baroreceptor reflex sensitivity (BRS) inpatients who are at high risk of acute deterioration frequently inducesthe following significant effects: a greater-than-normal increase in HR(a disproportionately large decrease in mean interbeat interval (IBI) inmilliseconds), an increase in the mid-frequency band log-power of HR, adecrease in the high-frequency band log-power of HR, an increase insystolic blood pressure (SBP), an increase in the variation coefficientSBP, an increase in the mid-frequency band log-power of SBP, an increasein diastolic blood pressure (DBP), an increase in the variationcoefficient DBP, and a decrease in the BRS index of the mid-frequencyband.

Measuring these variables ordinarily requires repeatedelectrocardiography and relatively complicated frequency-domain spectralanalysis computations. However, the studies resulting in the presentinvention revealed that even simple serial vital signs measurements areable to detect changes in BRS and autonomic physiology IBI-SBPrelationships, so long as sufficiently many longitudinal observations ofsupine- and 60-degree-tilted HR and SBP are acquired and suitabletie-breaking transformation and probit transformation of IBI and SBPdifferences and logarithmic transformations of the estimatedbaroreceptor reflex sensitivity (BRS) are performed.

A significant orthostatic pressure challenge is easy to arrange inroutine patient care settings. First, the patient is placed in a supineposition in bed and the resting HR and SBP are measured, either manuallyor by automated monitoring equipment. Then the motorized patient bed iselevated to an angle of 60-degrees, and the HR and SBP are againmeasured within 1 to 2 minutes after elevation of the patient seatedupright in the 60-degree bed. In one preferred arrangement, a total ofat least 12 such pairs of supine and 60-degree measurements arecollected, over a period of not less than 6 hours.

Embodiments of the present invention employ a copula analysis thatmeasures the statistical dependency (or lack thereof) between twotimeseries, namely, a timeseries of supine vs. 60-degree tiltdifferences in mean interbeat interval (IBI, or electrocardiogram R-to-Rinterval) and a timeseries of supine vs. 60-degree tilt differences inSBP. The comparison of supine vs. 60-degree tilt measurements is alow-risk, low-cost, noninvasive way to challenge the patient's autonomicnervous system that controls vascular tone and thereby estimate thebaroreceptor response sensitivity (BRS). If the BRS is decreasedcompared to normal, the patient's physiologic ability to withstandhemodynamic and cardiac stresses is likely impaired, in a manner that isstrongly associated with acute deterioration. Moreover, and even if BRSis still within the normal range, if the statistical copula between theIBI and SBP supine vs. 60-degree tilt differences displays a bivariatedependency and is well-fit by an extreme-value distribution (e.g.,Gumbel distribution), that too is a strong correlate of subsequent acutedeterioration. Computation of the BRS and of IBI-SBP copula as part ofthe present invention thereby reveals physiologic properties that areotherwise not evident in the raw data.

There are some deterioration events that are acute, with sudden onsetand no apparent antecedent abnormality or multivariate cluster ofabnormalities that predict the imminent event. Fortunately from thescreening and diagnostic perspective, a majority of patients whodeteriorate have a prodrome of hemodynamic and other abnormalities formany hours in advance of the onset of acute deterioration. This affordsa ‘window of opportunity’ sufficient for undertaking effectivepreventive and corrective actions and intensified monitoring so as tointervene more quickly and effectively than would otherwise tend tooccur.

In many instances, the prodrome involves a change in the bivariatestatistical relationship (copula) of the heart RR interval differencevs. the systolic blood pressure difference that is associated with anautonomic challenge, such as elevating the patient's position fromsupine to 60-degree elevation in bed or infusion of 4 mcg/kg ofepinephrine or phenylephrine. A normal patient who is not at risk ofdeteriorating tends to have a copula that is well-fit by a bivariatenormal distribution, but a patient who is destined to deterioratefrequently has a copula that is a member of the family of extreme-valuedistributions, such as Gumbel distribution.

The practical reality, however, is that statistical tests of thegoodness-of-fit of distributions to data require a considerable numberof observations in order to produce a reliable conclusion or p-value. Inan exemplary embodiment of the present invention, the model developmentdataset and model validation dataset were able to generate stable,reliable p-values only for copulas consisting of 12 or more sets ofmeasurements pre- and post-challenge. Accordingly, embodiments of thepresent invention achieve superior predictive accuracy and statisticaldiscrimination by (a) arranging suitable repeated challenge to thebody's autonomic nervous system and collecting heart rate and bloodpressure data before and after each such challenge, and (b) processingthe resulting array of information so as to generate a predictedprobability of acute deterioration (PPOD) from the log-transformedbaroreflex sensitivity, from the index of systolic blood pressure (SBP)deviation from the patient's usual SBP, and from the copula ofprobit-transformed pre- and post-challenge interbeat interval (IBI)difference and pre- and post-challenge SBP difference values.

In embodiments, the present invention finds significantly higher supinevs. 60-degree SBP differences, significantly lower log(BRS), andsignificantly lower values of the modulus between SBP and IBI, as anindicator of the BRS, during tilt in patients who deteriorate ascompared with healthier controls who did not deteriorate acutely. Thepresent invention further finds that the bivariate copula of IBI vs. SBPdifferences of patients who deteriorate are well-fitted by Gumbel orother extreme-value copulas, showing a high degree of interdependencybetween IBI difference and SBP difference associated with autonomic(orthostatic 60-deg tilt) challenge.

By contrast, the bivariate copula of healthier patients who do notdeteriorate are well-fitted by the normal copula or the Frank copula,showing IBI and SBP differences to be relatively independent of eachother statistically under conditions of autonomic challenge.

The natural logarithm of the mean baroreceptor reflex sensitivity (BRS)obtained over a series of not less than 12 such measurements, the indexof the deviation of the patient's current systolic blood pressure fromthe pressure that is usual for the patient, and the probability p>0.10that the bivariate copula of the autonomically challenged vs.unchallenged heart rate difference timeseries and the autonomicallychallenged vs. unchallenged systolic blood pressure differencetimeseries is not different from an extreme-value copula are combined tocreate a statistical classifier. In one embodiment these three variablesare combined via a logistic regression equation to produce a predictedprobability of acute deterioration (PPOD). Other embodiments may utilizealternative variable-combining algorithms and equations (such asneural-network, CART classification and regression tree, decision-rules,support-vector machine algorithms, etc.) to achieve a comparableclassification or predicted probability.

Computation of Risk of Acute Deterioration

Copulas are a way of quantitatively characterizing the mutual and jointstatistical dependence structures of vectors of multiple randomvariables. Although copulas have been studied for decades, they were notextensively applied until relatively recently. Interest in copulas hasbeen renewed recently in biostatistics, reliability engineering, andfinancial engineering, and other fields.

Modeling multivariate longitudinal data is an important challenge inbiostatistics. In the literature, most of the time the considered modelsassume that the original data or some transformation of them aremultivariate normal with a variance-covariance matrix structured todescribe serial dependence, heterogeneity and dependence betweenresponse variables. Unfortunately, normality is certainly not a rule inpractice, particularly with physiologic variables. When the responsesare not normally distributed, and when their marginal distributions arenot in the same family, alternatives to the multivariate normal must befound.

Very few tools exist in the literature to model such data. Zeger andLiang consider, at each time point t, a model for the mean of eachoutcome conditional on its history and on the values of the otheroutcomes at time t. The conditional variance of each outcome is assumedproportional to a fixed function of the conditional mean.

More tools can be found in the literature to deal with data of mixedtypes when the vectors of observations are only observed once onindependent or clustered units. A joint model for mixed continuous andcategorical data was first proposed by Olkin and Tate. It was extendedto deal with missing values in reference. Conditionally on thecategorical responses combination (with a marginal multinomialdistribution), they assume that the continuous variables aremultivariate normal. The EM algorithm is used to obtain the maximumlikelihood estimators (MLEs) in the presence of missing values. Liu andRubin generalized the approach by considering a multivariate tdistribution instead of the more constraining multivariate normal and byallowing different covariance matrices across cells.

Many models for mixed type data can be found in the literature devotedto the analysis of toxicity studies. These usually involve clusteredresponses of mixed types. One example is in toxicology. Fitzmaurice andLaird proposed modeling such data using marginal regression models foreach of the responses while treating the intracluster correlation as anuisance factor. GEEs are derived to obtain consistent parameterestimates while accounting for intracluster correlation. The parametersfrom the marginal regression models are robust to dependencemisspecification.

In embodiments of the present invention, the binary “deteriorated” vs.“did not deteriorate” response is modeled as an unknown copula class ofsupine and 60-degree tilt IBI difference values and supine and 60-degreetilt SBP difference values. Patients who do not deteriorate acutely tendto have copulas that are bivariate normally distributed, while patientswho do deteriorate empirically tend to have copulas that exhibitdependency that is characteristic of an extreme-value (Gumbel) copula.The physiologic reasons why this is so require further study. However,the statistical association of the “deteriorated” response with theextreme-value copula dependence structure may be empirically utilized ina predictive model regardless whether the mechanism that underlies theassociation is elucidated. Likely, the mechanism leading to theextreme-value copula dependence between IBI difference and SBPdifference under conditions of autonomic challenge has to do withaltered sympathetic and/or parasympathetic vascular tone or with acutealteration of baroreflex sensitivity and consequent acutely alteredhemodynamic compensatory capacity.

In some embodiments, a single term in the predicted probability of acutedeterioration formula may contain multiple medical data inputs. Forexample, as noted in the above incorporated discussions of PPOD variousmedical readings (supine and 60-degree tilted SBPs, IBIs, etc.) are eachtransformed before fitting a 12-point copula and calculating the PPODvalue. It is understood however, the multiple medical data inputs may becombined before being transformed, such that the transformed numbersused for forming a portion of the PPOD, are a combination of multiplehealth readings.

Regan and Catalano showed how to build a joint model for clusteredbinary and continuous outcomes with an application to developmentaltoxicology. They use an extension of the correlated probit model toobtain a joint distribution for the binary and the continuous responses.A joint multivariate normal distribution is considered for thecorresponding latent variables and each outcome is analyzed with amarginal dose-response model. The covariance matrix takes into accountthe correlation between outcomes and the correlation due to clustering.This is an important improvement of references and as model estimates ofthe correlation between responses and the evolution of thesecorrelations with dose are available. A marginal approach was preferredto conditional models with the arguments that the biological mechanismrelating the chemical exposition to developmental problems is not wellunderstood, and that conditional models are difficult to use to quantifyrisk or to study the marginal effect of dose on an isolated response.

In embodiments of the present invention, copulas are used to modelmultivariate non-normal longitudinal data. By definition, ann-dimensional copula is a cumulative distribution function with uniformmarginals. In the present invention, the three responses were treated asif they were multivariate continuous although the heart rate and bloodpressure are integer-valued and essentially discrete. When measuredmanually, the heart rate is often quantized into discrete valuesmodulo-4, inasmuch as heart beats are typically observed for 15 secondsand multiplied by 4 to obtain the minute-wise heart rate. When bloodpressure is measured manually, the pressures are typically recorded ineven numbered increments, modulo-2, due to the nature of thesphygmomanometer gauge or quantization of digital display values. Thesedata-conditioning considerations necessitate certain preprocessing toenable the copulas for PPOD calculations to be numerically stable.Copulas can be used whatever the type and the marginal distribution ofthe involved variables, but when non-continuous variables are involved,one must use finite differences instead of analytical derivatives of thecopula to calculate the likelihood values and one must randomly perturbthe data values to break ties. In the preferred embodiment, this is doneby randomly adding or subtracting a small value from each supine vs.60-degree-tilt IBI difference and from each SBP difference.

The data of relatively healthy patients who do not deteriorate areusually well-fit by the normal copula or by the Frank copula. Indeed, byspecifying two correlation matrices (which should be named moregenerally dependence matrices), we have defined entirely the dependencearising due to the repeated character of our measurements with the firstcopula and the dependence between the different types of measurements ateach time point with the second copula. However, nothing prevents usfrom using copulas other than the normal one. We refer the interestedreader to references for alternative multivariate copulas.

Except when considering bivariate Archimedian copulas, descriptive andgraphical tools are clearly lacking to understand the dependencestructure in the data and to make a preselection of appropriate copulas.This is the subject of ongoing work that we plan to publish later. Forthe moment, we select our copula(s) in simple parametric families(indexed by one or two parameters) by taking the one giving the largestlog-likelihood.

The estimation of the parameters (from the second copula) describing thedependence between the different variables was made conditionally on thefitted univariate marginal distributions. This uses the argument thatcontinuous margins in a copula model do not depend on the choice of thedependence structure of the data, suggesting that the modeling and theparameter estimations for the margins and the copula can be madeseparately.

In embodiments of the present invention, the bivariate copula of (a) theinterbeat interval (IBI) difference calculated from supine and 60-degreetilt heart rate measurements and (b) the supine vs. 60-degree tiltsystolic blood pressure (SBP) difference frequently exhibits propertiesof extreme-value copula (Gumbel copula) dependency and distributionstructure in patients who subsequently deteriorate with in an acuteperiod of less than 24 hours, whereas the IBI-SBP difference copula ofpatients who do not deteriorate shows little dependency between thevariables' distributions. The copulas may in principle be of anydimension, but in the preferred embodiment involve not less than 12contemporaneous IBI and SBP supine and 60-degree tilt values separatedby not less than 30 min. In the preferred distributed client-serverembodiment, an indexing service indexes and maintains buffered (cached)copies of the most recent 12 such sets of values for each applicablehospital inpatient, as well as a cached copy of the usual SBP for eachapplicable patient, for use in subsequent PPOD computations.

In a set of studies conducted, the copulas of stable non-deterioratingpatients are well-fitted by the normal copula or the Frank copula. Toinsure numerical stability of rank-based copula analytics, the rawvalues are first perturbed so as to eliminate any ‘tied’ values byadding or subtracting a small fractional (<0.1) random value from eachvector element before forming the bivariate copula of the vectors.

The presence of ties in the data substantially affects the estimation ofthe p-value. Ignoring the ties, by using midranks to computepseudo-observations or by other methods, can likewise bias the estimateof the p-value. Kojadinovic and Yan recommend constructingpseudo-observations by randomly breaking the ties, shifting the tiedordinates and abscissas by small random amounts, which is a methodologyemployed in an illustrative embodiment of the present invention.

As previously mentioned, embodiments of the present invention involvestatistical testing to determine whether or not the copula of aparticular patient is or is not an extreme-value copula, comparing theempirical copula with a rank-based nonparametric estimator of thepatient's copula derived under Pickands-type extreme-value dependence.The value of a binomial variable denoting the extreme-value copulapredicate may be generated by a variety of computational methods. In anillustrative embodiment, the PPOD inference engine service calls anevTestA function in the open-source R statistical package withmultiplier iterations count of at not less than 1,000. The determinationof extreme-value dependence structure, as is done in the illustrativeembodiment by the R evTestA function, returns the test statistic and thep-value of the test statistic. If the p-value is greater than 0.1, theextreme-value copula predicate value is set equal to 1. Otherwise, it isset to zero. The value of the extreme-value copula predicate variable isone of three variables that is employed in calculating the PPODprobability. The second of the three variables, the natural logarithm ofthe mean baroreflex sensitivity [ln(mean(BRS)), in log msec/mmHg], iscomputed from the same array of supine and 60-degree tilt IBI and SBPmeasurements. The third of the three variables, the index of thedeviation of the current SBP from the patient's usual SBP (shown in thetable of FIG. 3), is computed as a quadratic function of the absolutevalue of the difference between the current SBP and the patient's usualSBP.

In an illustrative client-server embodiment, the PPOD probability iscalculated via a logistic regression equation (shown as Eq. 1, below) inwhich the values of these three variables appear as terms:PPOD=exp(6.206−3.076*lnBRS+7.644*SBPscore+3.194*evTestAp)/(1+exp(6.206−3.076*lnBRS+7.644*SBPscore+3.194*evTestAp))  Eq. 1:and the resulting PPOD value is returned (a) to the inference enginewhose rules and processes may undertake realtime notification ofresponsible physicians and nurses via email, SMS text message, or otherappropriate means of notification, and (b) to the calling clientapplication program for display to the clinician user or for trendplotting or other uses. The PPOD threshold at which notification alertsare emitted may be selected at the health care organization's (e.g.,hospital's) discretion, depending on the epidemiology of acutedeterioration incidence rates, staffing levels of clinician individualsable to respond to such notifications, and other factors, as thoseskilled in the art will appreciate. In one embodiment, the threshold fornotification is PPOD>0.50.

Recalibration of Eq. 1 may be necessary for patient populations thatdiffer substantially from the populations whose study led to the presentinvention. The PPOD as disclosed in the incorporated documents, andabove may optionally be recalibrated to each hospital in which it isimplemented. Most hospitals have slight differences in procedures,standards, requirements and other elements of daily practice as comparedto other hospitals and some embodiments of the present invention may beadapted to a specific hospital's preferences. By adjusting the PPODequation according to an individual hospital's procedures, staffing, andpatient population, the PPOD may be more accurate.

The process for performing such recalibration will be familiar to thosepracticed in the art and involves accumulation a prospectiveobservational cohort of a sufficient number of patients, both cases whoacutely deteriorated and controls who did not, and the supine and60-degree tilt IBI and SBP data from each. In an illustrativeembodiment, multivariate logistic regression is performed on arandomized subset of such data, to calculate localized values of theintercept and the coefficient for each of the three variables. Then theother cases and controls that were not included in the first randomizedsubset are utilized as a confirmatory ‘validation’ subset and logisticregression is performed on these. If the intercepts and coefficients arein substantial agreement in the ‘model development’ and ‘modelvalidation’ regressions, then the new localized model is accepted andits values replace the default values in the PPOD equation. If theintercepts and coefficients are discordant, then the process ofaccumulating additional cases and controls continues.

Patient whose condition deteriorated within 18 hours (see FIGS. 4 and 5)

Patient whose condition did not deteriorate (see FIGS. 6 and 7)

The monitoring of a clinically unstable patient must be associated withan appropriate treatment to improve care, which can only occur followingan appropriate medical review triggered by a meaningful communication bythe bedside nurse to physician.

In one embodiment, the Predicted probability of acute deterioration maybe used to predict the odds of a crisis within N number of hours.Consider, for example, there is a 50% chance of a crisis in the next12-24 hours. This information may be used to assign additionalobservation to particular patients, or if a crisis is judged to beimminent, a call may be initiated to a Rapid Response Team. Another usefor the Predicted probability of acute deterioration is to routedoctor's rounds, so that walking instructions can be provided for adoctor doing rounds. This will allow a doctor to quickly attend topatients requiring more attention first, and then proceed to patientswhose condition is less urgent.

In some embodiments, creating the standard curve may entail reviewinggraphs of all previous patients with the same DRG/IDC-9 code in adatabase and plotting them as one or more curves. The curve may berepresented by an average curve, all of the individual patient's curves,a median curve, a top 25^(th) percentile and a bottom 25^(th)percentile, plus or minus some number of standard deviations therebycreating a normative recovery as well as upper and lower bounds, anycombination of the foregoing or any other representative indicator asnot all embodiments of the present invention are intended to be limitedin this respect. By using these types of normative curves a doctor maybe able to see that even if a patient is recovering, the patient mightbe recovering more slowly than the average patient with a similarcondition and this slower recovery might be cause for furtherinvestigation.

Not only may the grouping codes be useful in comparison with thepredicted probability of acute deterioration, but the grouping codes maybe utilized in generating a more accurate predicted probability of acutedeterioration. In some embodiments, a user may modify the algorithm usedto generate the predicted probability of acute deterioration based onthe diagnosis or grouping code of the patient in order to have thepredicted probability of acute deterioration more accurately reflect thepatient's recovery.

Yet another exemplary use of the PPOD arrangement is its use inpredicting the length of stay for a patient or group of patients,sometimes termed ELOS (expected length of stay). Such an arrangement maybe used to apply to a group of patients and therefore allowing ahospital to create a forward-looking resource plan, i.e. how many nursesare needed on a subsequent day of the week based on the current hospitalpopulation in a particular department. Some grouping codes, such as DRG,have ELOS times built into the grouping code, such that someone having acertain surgery will have an ELOS of a certain amount of time.

By comparing a patient's PPOD value with a standard, many inferences maybe drawn from the comparison. For example, in some embodiments, patientsmay be given a category, such as critical, critical but stable, serious,serious but stable, fair, and/or good. These categories may be words orterms, numbers (such as “low risk”, “intermediate risk”, “high risk”,“very high risk” or 1 to 4), colors (such as a heat-map displaycomprised of red, orange, yellow, and green shading of PPOD values), asystem of categorizing, or other appropriate information display system.In addition, the categories may be discrete, such as choosing one offour colors, or they may be continuous.

By having patients categorized, administrative decisions and carepriority can be determined accordingly. For example, in someembodiments, a nurse scheduling tool may be incorporated or separatelydetermined which would allow shift nurses to see the conditions of allpatients on the floor and assign nurses based on skill level, so thatmore experienced nurses have more critical patients and newer nurseshave more stable patients. In some embodiments, the nurse schedulingtool may rank patients, for example, 1-10 and allocate patients to eachnurse so that no nurse has a total patient rank of for example, morethan 25 (e.g., two very critical patients of rank 10 and one fair butstable patient of rank 5, four fair but stable patients of ranks 5.2,5.4, 5.7 and 6.1, or two serious patients of rank 8 and one serious butstable patient of rank 7.2). Similarly, these systems may be applied torouting a doctor's rounds, as described above.

In some embodiments, the PPOD may be used for evaluation purposes. Forexample, the PPOD may be used to evaluate the performance of aparticular doctor's or nurse's performance, or even of the hospitalitself. It can also be used to evaluate a particular treatment bystudying PPOD charts of patients that underwent a particular treatment.

In addition to evaluation of doctors, the system may be used to compareeffectiveness of medical treatments, compare the quality of careprovided by different wards or hospitals, and compare the skill ofhealthcare providers by providing an objective assessment of a patient'shealth and response to various factors. In some embodiments, thealgorithm may be customized after a patient's stay to further evaluatethe care of the patient and compare the patient with other patients. Forexample, if two patients had the same diagnosis and received differenttreatments, a hospital or doctor may want to compare those two patients'recoveries. Any two patients are evaluated using the same PPODalgorithm, but the comparison is tailored to focus on the recovery fromthe treatments and exclude unrelated deviations.

In another embodiment, the predicted probability of acute deteriorationchart shapes can be clustered to discover the “types” of patient healthtrajectories. General prototypical trajectories, or trajectoriescomputed as a function of disease or procedure may be compared againstactual PPOD charts to determine how a particular patient is respondingto treatment. Once a predicted probability of acute deterioration chartis assigned to such a prototypical trajectory, it may further indicatethe likelihood of various outcomes. In some embodiments, this may beaccomplished by using DRG/IRC-9 groupings.

In another embodiment of the present invention, the PPOD may be used aspart of a remote monitoring service, where a remote web-based healthservice provider can monitor the score of several patients and alert anon-site staff if there is an emergent condition meriting theirattention. The PPOD can be calculated using logistic regressionequations, neural networks, or other analytical methods. The predictedprobability of acute deterioration values may be fed to a cloud-basedhealthbank or a multi-institution central data hub and be used tomonitor for large scale trends in health problems, including abioterrorism or other public health occurrences.

While in some embodiments an individual predicted probability of acutedeterioration falling below a minimum mark or the change in predictedprobability of acute deterioration or slope of the timeseries ofpredicted probability of acute deterioration values falling below aminimum change may trigger an alarm or be interpreted by a healthcareprovider as an indication of the patient's declining physiologicstability, in some embodiments the change in slope or derivative of theslope of the predicted probability of acute deteriorations falling belowa certain minimum may trigger an alarm or be interpreted by a healthcareprovider as an indication of the patient's rapidly declining health. Forexample, if a patient is slightly declining and suddenly starts todecline at a much faster rate, this change in the acceleration of theslope may trigger an alarm. In some embodiments, the curvature of thepredicted probability of acute deterioration plot may be provided, suchas by a presentation and/or comparison module.

Many times a patient's health may be compromised in favor of conformingthe patient's care to established pro form a health care best-practicesand hospital logistics. For example, many hospitals require theirhealthcare workers to take a patient's vital signs every 2-4 hours,which requires awakening patients during the nighttime, which interfereswith providing full sleep and enter deep sleep, which may be critical toa patient's recovery, and to draw blood from patients every day or two,which can be detrimental to an anemic or hemophiliac. If a patient'scourse has been so far unremarkable and yet the patient has anincreasing predicted probability of acute deterioration, a healthcareworker may rely on the predicted probability of acute deterioration todetermine whether or not a contemplated diagnostic test or optionaltherapeutic procedure may be deferred or omitted in order to allow thepatient to better recover.

The system may include the ability to view a patient's prior hospitalvisits. In some embodiments, if a patient has a recurring condition, itmay be preferable to view that patient's past PPOD values in addition tothe present PPOD values, in order to anticipate what trajectories arelikely to materialize for this patient in the current acute-careepisode. Differences in data source (e.g., HL7 continuity-of-care CCDfrom a different institution where the patient previously receivedinpatient care) may be represented with unique point-icons or any othermeans of differentiating them, as not all embodiments are intended to belimited in these respects. In addition or alternatively, a physician orother provider may click on or hover over a graphed PPOD point to accessadditional information, such as the data inputted to calculate the PPODvalue, or other information.

In some embodiments, the PPOD value or a timeseries comprised of serialPPOD values may be a medical reference “figure-of-merit” that is used bya health caregiver, such as a physician, nurse or other provider, totrack the patient's risk of acute deterioration before, during or aftera medical procedure or illness, in order to assist in preventing thatpatient from reaching a health crisis. When used in this manner, thePPOD display enables the attending physicians and nurses to detecttrends in the patient's physiologic stability and hemodynamiccompensatory ability over time, particularly in evaluatingpost-operative recovery in the hospital. It also provides astatistically significant “outcome” for both clinical studies andretrospective studies of the relative efficacies among various surgicalprocedures or techniques, and among medical treatments and drugs.

Turning now to FIGS. 2A and 2B, a flow diagram illustrates an exemplaryprocess for determining a numerical probability of acute deteriorationin hospitalized patients.

At step 202, a patient is placed in a supine position. In the supineposition, at step 204, the SBP and heart rate for the patient ismeasured and recorded in an electronic health record or other patientrecord. At step 206, the patient is placed in a 60 degree (from supine)tilt position, and at step 208, the SBP and heart rate for the patientis measured and recorded (e.g., in the electronic health record). A timeperiod of greater than 30 minutes is then observed, at step 210. Step212 represents a decision point on whether the process of steps 202-210has been maneuvered at least 12 times for the patient within a 48 hourtime span. If the process has not been maneuvered at least 12 timeswithin a 48 hour time span, then the process returns to step 202 tocontinue to build sets of SBP and heart rate for the patient in order tomeet the requirement of 12 sets of measurements within a 48 hour timespan. Otherwise, if the required steps of SBP and heart rate have beenmeasured, the process moves from step 212 to step 214 where the lastN=12 sets of measurements are retrieved from the patient's electronichealth record.

The process then moves along three paths from step 214. Along one path,at step 216, a mean BRS is calculated for the patient. Then, at step218, the calculated BRS is log-transformed.

Along another path, at step 220, the SBP deviation index is calculated.

Along yet another path, at step 222, a supine versus 60 degree tilt IBIdifference timeseries is calculated. Then, at step 224, a small randomperturbation to timeseries is applied to break tied values.Additionally, returning to step 214, a supine versus 60 degree tilt SBPdifference timeseries, at step 226. Then, at step 228, a small randomperturbation to timeseries is applied to break tied values.

The results of steps 224 and 228 are then combined, and then at step230, a probit transformation is performed of IBI difference series andSBP difference series. At step 232, a bivariate copula of IBI differenceversus SBP difference is formed. Step 234 involves testing extreme-valuecopula null hypothesis HO.

At determination is then made, at step 236, if P>0.10. If true, then atstep 238, evTestA variable equals 1 and the process moves to step 242.Otherwise, if P>0.10 is false, then at step 240, evTestA variable equalszero and the process moves to step 242.

At step 242, the results from steps 218, 220, 238 and 240 are utilizedto calculate the predicted probability of acute deterioration (PPOD)score. At step 244, it is determine whether the PPOD score is greaterthan, for instance, 50 percent. If so, then at step 246, an alert isissued (e.g., through an electronic health record system) to appropriateclinicians who are treating the patient, and can be displayed on variouscomputing devices. Otherwise, if the PPOD score is below the setthreshold for an alert (e.g., below 50 percent), then at step 248, it isdetermine whether the patient has been discharged. If the patient hasbeen discharged, then the process ends at step 252. Otherwise, if thepatient has not been discharged, then at step 250, time period ofgreater than 30 minutes is then observed and the process can return tostep 202 for another set of measurements for eventually calculatinganother PPOD score through process 200.

The present invention has been described in relation to particularembodiments, which are intended in all respects to be illustrativerather than restrictive. Alternative embodiments will become apparent tothose of ordinary skill in the art to which the present inventionpertains without departing from its scope.

From the foregoing, it will be seen that this invention is one welladapted to attain all the ends and objects set forth above, togetherwith other advantages which are obvious and inherent to the system andmethod. It will be understood that certain features and subcombinationsare of utility and may be employed without reference to other featuresand subcombinations. This is contemplated and within the scope of theclaims.

The invention claimed is:
 1. Computer storage media, not being atransitory signal per se, storing computer-useable instructions that,when executed by one or more computing devices, cause the one or morecomputing devices to perform a method for determining a probability ofacute deterioration for a particular patient, the method comprising:receiving patient information comprising a plurality physiologicalmeasurements for a patient in anatomically challenged and unchallengedpositions; conditioning the patient information to create conditionedpatient information; and based on the conditioned patient information,determining a statistical probability of acute deterioration for thepatient, wherein determining the statistical probability of acutedeterioration involves determining a copula based on the conditionedpatient information and determining that the copula is an extreme-valuecopula, wherein determining that the copula is an extreme-value copulainvolves comparing the determined copula to a rank-based nonparametricestimator of the patient's copula.
 2. The media of claim 1, wherein thephysiological measurements comprise systolic blood pressure (SBP)measurements and heart-rate measurements for the patient.
 3. The mediaof claim 2, wherein the physiological measurements for the patient inanatomically challenged and unchallenged positions are derived from thepatient in a supine position and a tilted position, respectively.
 4. Themedia of claim 1 further comprising selectively providing a notificationbased on the determined statistical probability of acute deterioration.5. The media of claim 1, wherein the plurality of physiologicalmeasurements comprises a timeseries of measurements with timeseriesintervals greater than 30 minutes.
 6. The media of claim 1, whereinconditioning the patient information includes determining an index ofdeviation of the patient's current SBP from the patient's usual SBP. 7.The media of claim 6, wherein conditioning the patient informationfurther includes determining a baroreceptor reflex sensitivity (BRS). 8.The media of claim 1, wherein conditioning the patient informationincludes determining an anatomically challenged vs. unchallengedheart-beat interval difference timeseries and determining ananatomically challenged vs. unchallenged SBP difference timeseries. 9.The media of claim 1, wherein the statistical probability of acutedeterioration for the patient comprises a score.
 10. The media of claim1, wherein the predicted probability of acute deterioration isdetermined from by logistic regression, K-nearest neighbor clustering,neural-network, support-vector machine classifier, or other statisticaltechniques.
 11. The media of claim 1, further comprising determining apredicted length of stay for the patient, based at least in part on thedetermined probability of acute deterioration for the patient.
 12. Themedia of claim 1, further comprising allocating healthcare resources fortreating the patient, based at least in part on the determinedprobability of acute deterioration for the patient.
 13. The media ofclaim 4, wherein the notification comprises a visual or audible alert,email, SMS text message, or electronic notification provided to acaregiver for the patient.
 14. A method to prevent acute deteriorationof health in a population of patients, the method comprising: providingan electronic notification to caregivers of a set of members of thepopulation who exhibit above-threshold values of a predicted probabilityof acute deterioration (PPOD) score calculated from a timeseries ofphysiological measurements acquired from a patient in anatomicallychallenged and unchallenged positions, wherein a calculation of the PPODscore involves determining a probability that a copula of ananatomically challenged vs. unchallenged heart rate differencetimeseries and an anatomically challenged vs. unchallenged systolicblood pressure difference timeseries is an extreme-value copula, andwherein determining that the copula is an extreme-value copula involvescomparing the determined copula to a rank-based nonparametric estimatorof the patient's copula.
 15. The method of claim 14, wherein calculatingthe PPOD score involves computation of a baroreceptor reflex sensitivityand an index of the deviation of the patient's current systolic bloodpressure from the pressure that is usual for the patient.
 16. Acomputer-implemented method for providing a predicted probability ofacute deterioration for a particular patient comprising: receivingpatient-specific data from a health record, the data comprisingplurality of physiological measurements; conditioning thepatient-specific data to create conditioned data; calculating, from theconditioned data, a predicted probability of acute deterioration for theparticular patient by applying logistic regression, K-nearest neighborclustering, neural network, support-vector machine classifier, or otherstatistical technique, wherein the calculation of the predictedprobability of acute deterioration for the particular patient involvesdetermining a copula based on the conditioned data and determining thatthe copula is an extreme-value copula, wherein determining that thecopula is an extreme-value copula involves comparing the determinedcopula to a rank-based nonparametric estimator of the patient's copula;and selectively providing a notification based on the calculatedpredicted probability of acute deterioration.
 17. Thecomputer-implemented method of claim 16, wherein the calculation of apredicted probability of acute deterioration for the particular patientfurther involves computation of a baroreceptor reflex sensitivity and anindex of the deviation of the patient's current systolic blood pressurefrom the pressure that is usual for the patient.